 Welcome everybody to another episode of Modern Day Debate. I'm your moderator tonight Justin and tonight's topic is Communism versus capitalism. We got infrared and JF here to discuss those topics and infrared I believe you're going first so the floor is all yours sure So I Think that the era of capitalism that we call The capitalist mode of production is over capitalism is dead and we find not any real Capitalist economy in the world anymore. We rather find an institution Which on the basis of the principle of capitalism engages in the rapacious plunder and Destruction of nations and countries through debt through purely financial capitalism That is only based in the institution called capitalism But in reality no one else gets to participate in any kind of quote-unquote capitalism besides being debtors and the recipients of their predatory financial Predatory financial Behavior see today. There's no such thing as a free market. Sure You can open up a business and which there's a large likelihood of failure. That's okay It's all risk right, but if your business will ever get so successful to the point that it will come close To even rivaling the monopolies that exist doesn't matter even if it's a restaurant business You hit your head on a ceiling in which you have to conform to whatever the monopoly wants You have to get bought out by the ESG Rigged black rock and vanguard and so on and so on and the possibility that any kind of Entrepreneurialism that leads to the maximization of human liberty or anything of that sort is completely impossible Even libertarians today admit that we don't live in the so-called pure capitalism And my only contestion would would be that there was never a pure capitalism hundred years ago. You had people Toiling in factories and on farms with no possibility Whatsoever for any other kind of opportunity and now in the era of the rise of the middle class the rise of your Bureaucracy we don't have capitalism anymore So the dream of capitalism is over and the American dream is dead And it's time to stop trying to revive the American dream in the silly Individualist form where people think that there are gonna be the ones to finally get rich and make it out The truth is some people might get rich out of chance Maybe Bitcoin maybe something else, but it's not a solution to the problems. We're facing and the problems We're facing are very severe. We're no longer able to support our population. We don't have jobs in this country anymore Our infrastructure is garbage. We're not even laying Efficient use of the resources and natural wealth that we have here the fourth industrial revolution is happening And there's a big transition into a new era of technology I love technology but guess what the majority of people are gonna get left behind because not everyone can be a coder as Hillary Clinton said We need a common plan. We need to come together and take responsibility for our common fate and ensure that the transition into the new era That our country is headed towards and the new era of technology is done So in a way that fulfills the common prosperity of the people and we have to do this and this country is already acutely divided down the middle because people are too distracted to focus on who the real enemy is and who's the real enemy The enemy is the capitalist class and by the capitalist class. I don't mean your mom pause shops I don't mean your small business owners and people who just happen to have some spare wealth I don't it's not a matter of wealth or how rich you are it's a matter of how much power you have and it's the banks It's the monopoly capitalists who control our economy They control our country and it's political and the lice see a lot of dissidents who complain about the political Reality in our country and the woke stuff and this and that the root source of it is the ruling vampire like Parasitic capitalist class and always has who feeds you who controls your minds who controls your resources Who controls your factories who controls your infrastructure and your energy? That's way more important than anything else and those people disposed of that kind of wealth can see fit to implement any kind of agenda They want whatsoever American farmland should belong to Americans American minds should belong to Americans American resources should belong to Americans and should be put to use in a way that Sees and attends to the common prosperity of all Americans I don't believe in a government or a welfare state holding everyone's hand and making sure that every single person is Completely having the same outcome, but we're already paying what 50% in our taxes and paying these exorberant exorberant Teeths to what is effectively through the Federal Reserve mechanism a form of feudal rent extraction to the goddamn banks Why should we be doing that? Why shouldn't our government actually put our resources to use in a way that actually benefits us? Why are we sending it to Ukraine and to Israel and to all these other parasite countries and to the military industrial complex? Americans aren't seen a scent come back to them as far as the taxes that they're paying and Whether we do a tax strike whether we stop paying taxes or whether our taxes actually get to get put to good use that's a common question can only be resolved in a common way and There needs to be a common accountability and a seizure and a responsibility for our common future Because guess what without communism we are going to be enslaved to oligarchs and that's always been the truth in history We need to seize in some kind of way our means of production and make sure that they're accountable to us And that we have sovereign ownership of them Otherwise we can't complain about what's affecting our country sure we can blame China we can blame this we can blame that We blame everyone except the people right under our noses the capitalist class the people who actually plunder and steal our Money and rape and destroy our country with absolute impunity who are laughing themselves to the bank quite literally as the red versus blue Politics in this country takes hold and people argue and fight over got literally nothing and they play both sides They fund both forms of the media They fund the right wing dissident media and they fund the leftists as well And they're sitting back and they're having a great time watching everyone fight over things while not paying any attention to them I mean how is it that we don't own our own oil? How do we not own our own energy? How we don't even own our own banks the Federal Reserve is a private cartel of banks and look We all want to return to the fantasy of everyone being completely independent and us having no common reality and And no common responsibilities whatsoever. We all go live in the woods. That's a great fantasy, but guess what? You have to take responsibility for the people in this country. You have to take responsibility What what happens when we get old? You know and we don't have family around us What happens when the Golan gets tough and we find ourselves on the short end of the stick of bad luck and Most importantly, who's gonna defend our country? Who's gonna defend our borders? We need to take responsibility for our country and that's a common responsibility and Taken to its furthest conclusion. That's what communism is all about We need a government and a country that serves the working class majority and Which is cognizant of the fact that it is surrounded by enemies the people are surrounded by enemies oligarchical enemies Who want to see to a depopulation agenda? Destroying and plundering what little wealth we already have. We don't simply want to redistribute the wealth We want to exploit the wealth and potential that we have and we're being prevented from doing that Precisely by the capitalist class who has a monopoly on it Communism isn't about being jealous of people for being more prosperous. It's not about wanting equal outcomes for every single person It's about sovereignty. It's about sovereign control of the means of production by the working class and For so long they've distorted that meaning through propaganda and tried to make it into something else when in reality It's actually quite simple. It's quite simple. Whatever is elevated to the status of common responsibility We should own it why instead of giving these corporations subsidies We should Dissolve them or we should take them over ourselves instead of paying so much taxes to the government The government could pay for itself if we nationalized these sons of bitches But instead we like to pay our taxes and with what little we get already Americans should have more disposable income not less and the way you have that is through nationalization and I don't think everything should be nationalized. I don't think people's home should be nationalized and people's personal belonging should But when it comes to things that we all depend on every single one of us, that's not an individual form of private property That's a straight-up robbery of our common means of subsistence by a handful of parasites I Think I'll rest it there for now. That's it. All right, everybody. Thank you Infrared for your opening statement there. I know I just said that but I was muted So I wanted to make sure everybody heard me say it before I give the floor over to JF I just want to remind everyone that this is modern-day debate Our goal here is to attempt to have an equal and fair platform for anybody to come share their ideas and discuss or debate against people with different points of view having said that I would like to ask the chat tonight to Avoid any personal attacks to our debaters We want to keep this a happy place if we can and if you are happy and you know it Click that like button and don't forget to start sending those super chats I see some of you already very active with those super chats And I'm recording them for later when I will ask our debaters those questions. We lost in Fred All right. Well, I can still start my intro if you want Yeah, I'm just I hope he'll be listening Yeah, I'm sure he will be back and I'm sure he will hear us in some other form Let me just adjust the screen so that We can see you while you do your opening debate now because everything is all a mess when someone drops out like that so one second and Which one of these will do it the up screen should do it no Yes, I do that that'll work. Oh, he's coming back here. Hang on All right, just hang on folks. We're just gonna he's coming Minimize it once and then it completely went black. So I had to leave and join again. Sorry about that. I'm not gonna Yeah, all right Yeah, so as we were everyone hitting like subscribe JF the floor is all yours All right, well what an intro by in for a read the quite spectacular And I find myself agreeing with 99% of what is said but there is a There is a little trick a trickery of magic that he does which is a label and He attributes to capitalism all of the is that he lists But what he lists are not is of capitalism They are is that are representative of the fact that our society has become less and less Capitalistic with time and has become more and more Communistic has left too much power to the state and all of the is that he lists I agree, but they stem not from what he thinks it is not the private capitalist parasitic class that true capitalistic mean is exploiting our work What's happening is that they are through the state creating these monopolies through the state keeping anyone from developing competition that makes sense through the state harassing people and blocking them on individual rights and their rights to Profit from their own business ventures, which keeps them small players and creates a parasitic class that Accommodates wealth privately but does so through the forced arm of the state and What we have to what we have to get rid of is this fact that 50% of our money goes to the government That yes, it is mismanaged and what infrared is demanding We already have the people are in control of this system The people can vote in the system that we have attained that he describes as sick is The system that people have constantly voted for so the people is not to be trusted with power to the contrary We have to go back to a more basic form of capitalism where power is fully in the end of private Interest simply because people are too stupid to guide a society I wouldn't trust them with my children I wouldn't trust them with my money and you wouldn't probably and so why would you trust them with the entire fate of Society, let me just list through everything that I agree with from infrared The era of capitalism is over capitalism is dead. Yes true The depth the fake systems that name itself capitalism, but has no feature of it absolutely true It's a fake system. We're in it's not capitalism Today there is no such thing as a free market absolutely correct There was never a per capitalism happening in the world that is true I agree capitalism is an ideal and it's always implemented in a form that will have some Weaknesses to it. It's time to stop trying to revive the American dream in the silly individualist form. I agree I agree capitalism is not about individualism Capitalism is a system under which I want big families to rise I want groups to feel that they're together I want groups to be able to freely associate between one another and not be kept from Associating in groups and against other groups Infrared says the real enemy is the capitalist class the people that he's talking about are not per Capitalists the people that he's talking about are people who play the triangle of power between the state the fed and the private sector And they do it well. They do it well for themselves This is a parasitic class that yes We must find a solution to in our world, but those are not capitalists. Those are Authoritarian status, they wouldn't be able to pull what they're pulling with without the state They wouldn't be able to pull what they're pulling without the fed and so we we must diagnose the problem properly Because if we don't we will make the system worse through the very same mean that it became that bad And that mean is the power to the people Democracy which has been going on forever in the US and has led to the current situation Infrared says his problem is not with the small business owners. It's the people with power banks monopoly capitalist politicians. I agree He says American farmlands should belong to Americans American minds should belong to Americans and should contribute to the wealth of the American people. I agree But how do we get there? How do we make sure that the product of American innovation in all its forms ends up paying To the people who produce this innovation ends up increasing their wealth rather than the wealth of someone else Well, the first step is not to collect taxes on every case of success The first step is not to collect taxes at the 50% level. The first step is to lower The size of the state so that people can have private wealth that is not looked upon as a form of drainable Parasitize a easily parasitized form of wealth He says let's stop money sending money to Ukraine Israel. I agree But it's not capitalism that's sending money to Ukraine and Israel it is Communism it is the very mechanism that infrared is suggesting we Direct society with which is power to the people power to the people means you elect Representatives these representatives and the government currently are taking your money and sending it to Ukraine and Israel I don't see Elon Musk sending much money to Ukraine and Israel Maybe he's developing some satellite work here and there But otherwise the Elon Musk is not sending billions to Ukraine for the war effort It's the very people who are supposed to represent the people and who do so under that are democratically elected to do So so the problem is not in the private sector here. The problem is in state power Infrared touches a point which I believe is our main point of disagreement and the whole Mislabeling that he does of criticizing capitalism for what truly are the acts of the state I think that's where it breaks my disagreement my agreements with him He says we have to find a way to manage money efficiently That is very important and I would like this debate to be mostly around this because I think it's where we differ You do not You do not attain an efficient management of money by trusting the people You you cannot even trust the workers who are a more intelligent subset of the people Even the workers are too stupid. You can't even take a subset of them to Manage wealth. What is the proper way to manage wealth? It is not to entrust it to the mob not entrusted to a democracy not entrusted to Representatives all of these things have failed and they are failing right in front of our eyes the mechanism that true capitalism Proposes for management of wealth is whoever makes profit gets to manage the next generation of That wealth if Elon Musk's finds a way to develop something called Paypal and if it turns out that paypal is genius in its time and it's something that really people needed Elon Musk ends up having a lot of money from paypal and Elon Musk gets to put that money into the next effort into whatever it is the next innovation effort that we will Deploy and Elon Musk invests it in electric cars And if it turns out that it was a genius move to invest it in electric cars He gets even more money And now he invested in free speech and if it turns out as it seems to be that x is currently rising as a platform a unique platform of free speech on the internet and attracts more and more users If that was the the right move Elon Musk will get even more money to send us to mars like monkeys in space And perhaps build bases wherever he wants That is the rule of capitalism. It's the idea that Most people are stupid not not like 50 percent of people are stupid 99.999 percent of people are stupid And they shouldn't be given a dollar to manage except the one they can win from their own work Otherwise, if you're talking about good management, you need someone who demonstrate his success on the free market Someone like Elon Musk who creates something that everyone else wants and the only system that has a way to manage this The only system that properly and efficiently manages what will be our next effort Is capitalism and it's it's expression in people like Elon Musk who have known how to do the right thing and when to do it So capitalism is the only solution to this problem And I suggest that infrared cannot tonight Provide us any answer that is satisfying with regards to how do we Manage innovation research and future directions in a communist nation All right jf. Thank you so much very well said and that's the opening statements from both of our debaters Once again, thanks everyone for coming out and checking this out. We're almost at 400 live viewers That's very exciting and super fun for everyone Don't forget to hit that like and subscribe button now I'll just add here real quick before we get into our 50 minute live discussion I know you guys are all missing james. We are all missing james as well, but he is so busy Getting that doctorate diploma and so we all wish him the best Good luck getting that doctorate and we'll see him back as soon as possible But in the meantime, thanks to your guys for support. We are at 164,000 subscribers, which is just crazy and super cool And with that we'll get back to why you're all here the open discussion 50 minutes infrared jf Go for it So I'll try to answer the question as best I could that you just posed. How do we manage our wealth? Well simple We acknowledge that it's our wealth in the first place that the wealth Somehow has to be understood as a common wealth That doesn't mean all of our personal belongings get aggregated in a single circle to be redistributed It means our real sources of wealth, which is our natural resources Which is our productive forces our industries and our factories and whatnot To the extent that they get to a scale that becomes a monopoly It needs to be under the sovereign control In a central way a central administration and sovereign control. I don't believe in Quote-unquote democracy in the sense that we we we leave management all up to individuals That would be ridiculous the whole point of centralizing and having a central plan It's for the very brightest for the very Most talented for the very smartest to participate in actually managing the resources of the country in the best way But you need to leave opportunity Open to the possibility that there's untapped genius out there Which you haven't accounted for in your plan So this is where I just agree with the view that I think 99 of people are stupid I think there's potentials in people that aren't being realized that could be And whatever of course it's always going to be an exceptional minority But you need to leave room For people to be able to actually dispose of resources in ways that are unaccounted for before now You mentioned people like Elon musk and how Their ability to manage these enterprises means that they should be entitled to having more resources to manage more enterprises You know, actually, I don't even strictly disagree with that But I think the key word is management Of course, there's exceptional Talented managers and administrators, right? But there needs to be an accountability to the commonwealth to the common Reality that we have Elon musk shouldn't be able to have a company for example I'm not saying he is now, but he shouldn't be able to have a company Where he disposes of resources in such a way That it hurts the collective harmony of the country as a whole and comes at the expense of everyone else It needs to be balanced and reconciled in some kind of central way So I disagree that the second thing I want to say and we can kind of get into more stuff But the second thing I want to say is I don't agree with the view that the people are in power I think what we have as democracy quote-unquote is a complete sham what we actually have is an oligarchy and those actual popular figures that rise up and give expression to the real spiritual direction and and uh And voice of the people those people all get assassinated They get put in jail and they disappear from the public spotlight I mean they would have assassinated trump and he trump caved To the elites and and and in so many different ways and they still want to throw him in jail for that Every time we've seen any kind of grassroots leader Most people haven't heard of them or they get assassinated they get killed or the fbi locks them up or something else Along those lines happens. We definitely don't have a democracy. We have an oligarchical spectacle of democracy if I ran for president for example And and I could cross a sufficient threshold where people would know about me and I'd be out there They there was there would not even be a five percent chance That the powers that be would allow me to rise to a level of contesting The candidates that they prefer they don't let you get that far. I mean trump only got as far as you did because the Sheldon Adelson Let's remember that I don't agree that people are in control and look, I don't think Everyone's a rocket science scientist. I totally agree. Most people are simple. It's called simple people But what they do have is perspective and wisdom and it's a perspective and wisdom on for example How to reproduce a culture How to tinker with I mean put it this way Jeff Bezos probably has a much smarter than your average mechanic, right? But does Jeff Bezos have experience working with cars and knowing how they work? Does Jeff Bezos know how to How to manage a farm? Does he know about these realities? Probably not, right? So it's a division of labor. You have to appreciate that there's some people that have perspective that Highly efficient and smart managers don't and I'm not against talented smart and efficient managers I'm just against oligarchical capitalist elites plundering our resources to worship Molok, which is what they're doing All right going back to the question of a central authority And here we we are with the we open on the problem of a central authority Which is how do you select the ultimate decision-making mechanism of that central authority? Some people would say it's a dictator. It's a communist dictator that you're putting in power Some people would say well, let's leave the Device of the people capable of controlling that dictator The problem is always the same, which is whatever authority you name will be corruptible Will be subject to the very same type of parasitism that you don't like from our current society So what makes you think that you have a better Authority selection system than capitalism Well, it's simple. I think that the corruption always comes from the formation of an oligarchy So actually an actual dictatorship is actually much better at preventing corruption Than a than a so-called formal democracy And i'm not saying I advocate for a formal dictatorship I'm just saying when you have a popular leader Beloved and accountable to the people and who puts and elevates the people's interests first It's difficult for oligarchs to maneuver around to have Solidify their positions and turn it into a dynastic and generational position at everyone else's expense So I am not an advocate for I believe in power of the people through a leader I don't necessarily believe in power to the people in the sense of An extremely bureaucratic decision-making Completely democratic everything ever you vote on everything you vote on what the toilet paper looks like I don't believe that right? And I I think there's some people who talk about Workers cooperatives being the model for the whole country And you know, I think workers cooperatives work very well at a certain level of scale But when you scale up you need More of a central form of authority you need representatives And that's why it needs to be balanced You need to have a central authority that interfaces with all of the lower levels of management And that's actually the figure that Stalin was in a lot of ways He would before he would make any decision. He would call the universities He would call up the technical specialists. He'd call the engineers He would get a well rounded perspective before making the final decision And I think the final decision is important But how do you prevent corruption? I think it's simple. You need vigilance. You need a vigilant population That's armed not a lot of people know this Mao's china one of the most heavily armed populations in human history And the guns only started to be illegal After the reforms of Deng Xiaoping even the enver hojas albania had similar levels of Gun ownership so people need to assert sovereignty But they don't have to do that in an overly complicated way if if those empowers start Abusing the dignity of the people and start abusing their authority in corrupt ways You need to have an armed mob with torches and pitchforks that can set things right and I I trust I trust the people. I don't think the people are rocket scientists But I think when they see for example elderly women getting kicked out of their homes that they lived in for generations And being thrown out onto the street and they want to take torches and pitchforks and start, you know Setting things right. I think that's a god-given instinct. They've been given I think when people see children being molested, I think the mob knows best to be honest So in this regard, I think you need to have a combination of a strong central authority and a strong Vigilant population And these this is how you assert sovereignty in a way that doesn't allow the corruption we're talking about to take hold Here's my problem Suppose that I would grant that you can find a good leader once What's the mechanism that gets this leader replaced by A continually good leader 10 years later and then 20 years later another good leader The problem is that I don't see a system at all in which the right person is being chosen And what I see is at the moment of transition in any authoritarian system or centrally controlled system You're going to have people capable of elevating the leader that they want the leader that is corrupt to advantage their subclass How do you keep that from happening at the transition level? How do you make your choice ever and ever better? I think every leader is always susceptible to the public perception always every single leader Every single leader has a mystical even relationship with the mood of the entire country And to that extent A leader a good leader cannot be selected simply selected. There's no council of experts that's going to be able to permanently Select what the good leader is going to be And it's enough that a leader is good by the way not every leader has to be great In my opinion Mao was a great leader, right? Deng was a pretty good leader, right? But the ones that came after Hu Jintao Jiang Zemin and so on those were I would say good leaders. They were they weren't Extraordinary but they kept the stability of the country going and then comes along Xi Jinping who is a great leader And how did Xi Jinping come along? Because he correctly articulated the spiritual mood and direction of his country He was a populist in that regard, but I can see to you. You will not always have a great leader They wouldn't be called great if every single leader was great But there's no way to select for it beforehand. There's no way to ensure that a system is going to guarantee Your leader is going to be good. It's the responsibility of a population to keep their leader in check It's not the responsibility of a group of experts It's ultimately always going to be the responsibility of the people and as a matter of fact I do agree to an extent that we the people are responsible for the power system we have in this country only I don't think it's in the form of democracy I think it's in the form of our indifference The fact that we just watch sunday night football every week and ignore the golems of the world And we don't even care or take responsibility for what's going on in our country And we're basically living in a bubble completely isolated from the reality surrounding us like frogs being boiled slowly in water I agree. We are responsible for this situation But the moment we is the moment we really feel and and and awaken to how much power we the people actually have I don't think you can erase that it's it's difficult to even when the soviet union Was dissolved there was riots on the street. They brought tanks down Because people even then at that point in the existence of the soviet state Could not reverse the sense of responsibility They had for it that it was their state and they didn't want to let it Dissolve or get collapsed and what do you know putin comes to power a decade later? Because here's what I believe the people always win the people are always the masters of history for better or for worse And it's not because they're smart. It's not because they're rocket sciences It's because a country is always a body politic. It's a body of the people. That's what a nation is Right. What else are we talking about? If not a country of people, right? So that is always going to determine the course of history for better or for worse And the problem is that people have not awakened to this level of responsibility and power that they have and communism is about It's class consciousness spreading consciousness precisely of that It's kind of a circular Definition that must be always true that the people win because the people who don't win End up dead very often in the history Sometimes killed by the very dictators that you would praise and that you would want to lead a nation And so I think that yeah, whatever people is left alive after historical events They do have some power because they can revolt they can block systems Or they can allow systems to continue But this is ultimately my problem with central authorities of all kind Which is that you have no mechanism to ensure the continued Non-corruption of your center of your central authority Whereas capitalism has an incremental approach to always make leaders that have demonstrated something That they've demonstrated that they were able to manage a smaller amount of money And get more profits from it. So Capitalism is ever improving if you can keep it going Communism is always headed toward corruption. It's only a matter of time Even if the times are good at a particular point in time because you ended up with the right leader There's no mechanism to ensure that the next leader will even will be even better Whereas in capitalism a leader gets to lead a company because he has a certain amount of wealth that he has accumulated He's entitled to spend that wealth once It's false to think of rich people in our nations as rich forever Their wealth will dissolve at some point and in fact, it's pretty quick It takes a couple of generations before any amount of wealth that has been accumulated will end up being dissolved So I think that capitalism offers us a better alternative, which is yes Your good your good leader which would have arisen in a communist system Can show his talents in capitalism He can start small and he can grow and grow until he controls more In communism that person will will either be allowed or not allowed And it will be dependent on whatever central authority has determined to be the priority directions for investment of wealth and and resources But the the key thing is that when you say capitalism you're talking about the ideal kind and I'm not talking about an ideal kind of Commodism because I don't believe in ideal Reality I don't believe in says I believe in reality, right? So as you yourself would admit this may be an ideal of capitalism, but nowhere is it the reality And that's exactly the issue I am not forwarding if I was forwarding an ideal communism. I could just say well, actually people can just manage themselves We don't even need to have any kind of authority whatsoever And there were just uh, you know everything would just work out magically on its own And then if we talk about an ideal capitalist and we can likewise say the free market will select for everything It'll select for good leaders on its own But this isn't what happens in either. I think there are a lot there are a lot of what you've presented today that are the ideal situation You've I don't think leaders you've supposed that leaders had a form of mystical power tying them to the people You've said that these leaders would again and again and these people would again and again Get the right leaders by imposing their force the reality of a communist system is People will have blind spots and leaders will be able to go corrupt in ways that the people can't tell Let's let's where it happens. Sure. I'm not speaking in ideals. So I am happy to go through the uh examples In what ways was Mao a corrupt leader? I don't know the history of Mao. So I won't quote it. What about Stalin? Well, uh Stalin as uh as fought against his own population and as As engaged in uh in starving certain parts of his population That would be an example of corruption Stalin didn't starve a single section of his population And in terms of fighting his own population if by his own population, you mean the would be oligarchs In the uh, soviet bureaucracy who precisely did try to abuse their power toward the end of corruption That is the people that Stalin fought. That's who the people who he purged he didn't fight in purge ordinary people He fought the ones that were trying to terrorize them actually So I just agree that this Stalin had nearly a million of his own citizens executed beginning in the 1930s How can you how can you be referring to the great purges? Are you not? I may I don't know the name of it. So I certainly know that Stalin has eliminated It's an exaggerated figure But you're aware that almost everyone caught up in the great purges was already in a position of power And they were corrupt people abusing their power and that's who Stalin got rid of you're aware of that, right? I believe no, I believe that when you kill a million people It is extremely likely that you will commit acts of non undue process in the in doing so Millions more fell victim to forced labor Departation famine massacres and forced labor is an interesting word So would you describe forced labor as the predominant reality in the u.s Because the prison per capita population of the united states of america Is higher than any point under Stalin in the soviet union right now And we all know that the penal labor is not something unheard of In the u.s. Correctional facilities So we we play around with words to demonize the soviets in the Stalin era a lot But the reality is given the circumstances and the conditions I don't see evidence of any corruption. You could say it was exceptionally harsh But harsh circumstances require harsh decision making it's easy for us to sit and look and say oh how brutal and how harsh But we're not faced with those circumstances And when we were we were not ourselves foreign to methods of brutality and ruthlessness On a much grander scale than we can say for the soviets. We had slavery. We had chattel slavery We had uh the the colonization. I mean There is no position with which we could judge the so the harshness of the soviet union when in fact it was Much more humane than what gave rise to our comfortable modern societies today. So I just agree it is a great I don't think that the soviet union was an example of due process And to make the moral equivalence by comparing them to people who have been found guilty of crimes in the u.s Is absolutely ridiculous in my view I wouldn't have wanted to undergo criminal proceedings in 1930 under Stalin So so you're talking about two different things There is the penal camp system which was for rapists for murderers for Criminals and thugs and mind you they they they existed In the early days of the chaos of the soviet union on a widespread scale So we they exist in the u.s. They also existed there criminals were a thing right and they had very limited resources And how do you deal with the question of criminals? Well, they could have just killed them all but they didn't So they tried to reform them through labor Now the second thing is you're talking about is the great purges where people in prominent positions of power were subjected to harsh harsh penalties Some of them were sent in prison. Some of them were killed and shot for treason But ask yourself the following question a decade earlier You're invaded by every single country on earth every single major power on earth invades The early soviet union you have a snakes den of traitors and treasonous scum Circulating the government trotskies in all manner of these people. How would you have disposed of them? How would you have dealt with them? I mean Whether you think it's unlikely that there were so many traitors and so many People corrupt and abusing their power or whether you think that there were but there wasn't enough due process How do you deal with this phenomena and this problem? I don't think we're in a position to judge It's a harsh circumstance requires a harsh response Certainly not by arbitrary killing and in 1932 and 1933 millions of ukrainians Were killed in the holodomor a man made famine engineered by the soviet government of joseph staden So the the holodomor is a phrase that was used by ukrainian nazis To describe what was just a famine that the soviet union experienced which was by no means intentional And which was the result of the rapid and sudden modernization of agriculture Mind you the sudden and rapid modernization of agriculture in any context would lead to a severe disruption of the food supply And thereby lead to mass starvation It happened in almost all the colonies britain had where there were sources of major extraction of resources We had the bengal famine resulted in few million millions of death over the The decades and the centuries you had the irish potato famine which killed way more per capita per population than the soviet union And china the history of industrialization and modernization is an ugly one only in the west all of the consequences of this industrialization were Offloaded onto colonies in foreign countries Whereas the soviet union and china had to actually in an independent way modernize their agriculture now They made mistakes as anyone would under the pressure of having to so rapidly do this And why do they have to rapidly do it because they needed to industrialize because These capitalist powers these imperialist powers were planning on invading them again. Stalin said 1931 We have 10 years to catch up or they bury us 1941 what happens operation barbosa the nazis invade So they had to do this. It was a harsh again harsh circumstance Required a harsh response. Was the was the famine a big mistake. Was it a form of mismanagement? Sure Sure, but it wasn't intentional. That's the important thing that year was a drought By the way, there was a huge drought that year the harvest was not good And by the way, this was the last major famine in in the history of russia in general Besides the war besides the war We had opened this parent is this with you asking me, can you find me an example of Stalin failing of Stalin Going corrupt. Well, here's one example. That's not it doesn't have to be intentional corruption can be That is neither corrupt nor can Stalin be laid the Okay, let's call it mismanagement. My problem with communism is mismanagement that kills millions of people As as far as I know, there weren't millions of people dying from this revolution in the u.s. Yes, there were when the In order for the revolution in the u.s. To have been possible There had to have been millions of the indigenous people who died And moreover is not is not slavery comparable as an atrocity. That's the key. Yeah The the indigenous had to be fought as an external force to the american society But the american society didn't crumble on their mismanagement of its farms When when when new new farm apparatus showed up or new forms of farming But there's a few things the u.s. Had a century to modernize its agriculture and its industry And moreover with foreign aid and investment that propelled it british loans I mean u.s. Industrialized on the back of british loans. Everyone knows that right, but the soviet Are the advantages of capitalism These are the advantages of not being under siege by every major world power because you're defying the bankers The soviet union flipped off the the oligarchical banker elites that rule the world And so they decided to lay siege on it from every corner and put them in such a desperate And intense situation Ideally speaking there should have not been any kind of famine But it was the pressure by the foreign predatory powers that wanted to plunder soviet resources And lay ruin to them that made them have to do it so rapidly And and when you when you have to do it so rapidly, there's gonna be mistakes. That's not a result of corruption That's a result of the circumstances this understanding of history is like the The guy who beats his wife and then says well, she provoked it and so I had to do it Foreign powers should not be able to put you in a state of Instability such that you end up killing your own people through mismanagement I would say that the theory that has has been displaying here is not accepted at all In fact, it's wikipedia levels of agreement around the fact that yes, it was an intentionally caused famine I don't particularly care about this case But what he's presenting here is an absolutely out of the the left field theory of the oladom Okay, let's let's talk about responsibility annually. There are 3.1 million children under five Who die because of starvation? That's annually. Okay, that's just children under five I didn't mention all the other people. Is that the who's responsible for that for the mismanagement of that The irish potato famine I mentioned that the countless famines under the history of capitalism and colonialism The countless famines that happen under the history of the russian empire that everyone seems to conveniently ignore Where's the responsibility? See that's the great thing about capitalism in a capitalist system when there's a famine and all these people starve No one's responsible. It's just nature. It's just the natural forces of the market So you can't blame the system. You can't blame the ideal But when this happens very suddenly and rapidly and then is immediately corrected and never happens again in a communist state Somehow this is uh, this is the result of uh, Stalin being corrupt or or himself mismanaging The truth is when you're responsible for your common reality and your common affairs You take the blame for the mistakes that you make And that wasn't just Stalin who who made these decisions It wasn't him who made the decision to for example not report and by the way all these people were purged That were running ukraine at the time who are not properly reporting the situation on the ground They were all purged and removed. These are precisely people who were victims during the great purge, right? And and more they were killed to them too They they killed the people who were actually responsible for the mismanagement of the famine absolutely and then but but let me ask you a question We have a fentanyl crisis in the united states. Have we killed a single pharmaceutical executive who was responsible for uh Fulfilling this country with drug opioids and getting the american people addicted to these drugs nothing There's no consequence. There's absolutely no consequence. We don't hold anyone responsible And we don't say this is a fault of capitalism. We say that this is just the reality There are currently there are currently open court cases about this. So In in capitalism nothing keeps you from punishing people for crimes and what do you think that punishment is going to amount to I don't know. What will the family pay? There are already Already big amounts that were attributed in damages in this and there will be more So this is the result of the sackler family and not the capitalist system as a whole Well, uh, it depends. I mean, no, it's not that it depends because you're saying combined Let me tell you the fentanyl crisis is a combined effect of capitalism in a system that allows its corruption Uh through state and terrest through reimbursement of medication through I'm willing to take full responsibility for the real reality of communism But it seems like you're not willing to take responsibility for the reality of capitalism Where do we find the ideal capitalism that you would be willing to defend? The ideal capitalism has never been implemented, but I would say something like early america Without slavery could qualify as what I'm looking for but there was no such thing. There was no such thing There's no early america didn't exist Without slavery it had slavery Well, okay remove slavery and no you can't you can't you can't pick and choose the variables That's like me saying that's like seeing me saying all communism, but without all the harshness and without a famine early canada What was going on in early canada? There was nothing. How was that an ideal exactly? Yeah What was ideal nothing going on? What would no big government? So just an empty forest colonizers Edited by a common religion who were building a nation That is what you realize a lot of these early american settlers because canada was then considered part of the americas You realize that they built societies that were communistic and communal in nature, right? They weren't free enterprise capitalists who were just implementing some kind of a system of of Entrepreneur you know individual entrepreneurship those were a kind of communists They were all sharing the resources and attending to the common affairs That is a historical Communism has never been the system in canada except if you want to call the current government You're not talking about a system in canada. You're talking about settlers setting up villages and kind of just Settling in canada why i'm here to tell you they didn't really have a capitalist system And he wasn't living on their communism. He had these these little businesses There were you know grocery stores mechanic mechanic shops and yes, it was capitalism that what year was this What year is this? Well, my grandfather himself must be between 1920 and 1940 1950. All right. Well, that's not early canada And and by the way in early talking about early canada Slavery wasn't even abolished in canada until 1834. So I don't there's there's no ideal or any early canada the 1920s By that time the bit the global bankster is completely control canada. I mean, it's a complete colony. So Absolutely, if you know the history of if you go in a village of canada in the 1920s, you will see Commerce being alive free markets. Hold on. That's that's that's that's a village If you go to a colcos under stall and there were colcos markets that you could say were free markets That's one village. You have to take responsibility for the entire country Not just one small isolated village and the bigger picture that we do see in canada as a whole is far from an ideal capitalism He described by the 1920s capitalism was run by monopoly cartels and banksters. It wasn't a free market country. No No, people's existence was uh could be made independent of these cartels which could exist in some point But that's a hypothetical that's a hypothetical scenario. We have never seen it's not an hypothetical scenario It's the canada that my grandfather lived in the canada your grandfather lived in was controlled by british led monopoly capital It wasn't a free market No, the existence of my grandfather and his farm was absolutely independent of these uh of these cartels I don't know that he ever suffered from any of these cartel and that he was ever there There's plenty of people entertaining business, but there's plenty of people Hold on just because your grandfather did not experience the effects of the system in a negative way Doesn't mean that system was a free market capitalist system Ideally, as you'd say there's people today who don't experience the negative effects of the system We have that doesn't make it ideal capitalism thing is you're trying to make a point that I don't even disagree with If if there were systems in the past I've said that these systems were not per capitalism and you're trying to make me say that they are not per Capital, but I'm just saying I understand but but I'm not is per communism either A lot of these systems that you would call communism I've let some sort of local free market to exist some sort of local accumulation of wealth And so no system is per that's that but I'm just trying to say that you're making that claim I think I think the issue is that for me communism is not an ideal That's what i'm trying to say for you capitalism isn't ideal for me communism means something a lot more concrete and real which is Yeah, I mean It is an ideal I I disagree to make up you have to make up narratives that are completely contrary To what historians have established considering the a la demore would you say would you say even in your alternate narrative where it's a mismanagement? It's so grave You you agree with me management that leads to millions of you agree with me that you agree with me that Alligarchical banksters are in control they control the money supply and they control the public institutions They control the universities and the academies and you're trying to say there is no possibility whatsoever that these people could have lied about Soviet history I think that they could have lied but you should make the demonstration I don't think you've made the demonstration that they've lied they absolutely have lied There is no evidence whatsoever not an iota of evidence that there was any intentional famine in ukraine again I don't care about the intentional aspect. I care about the fact that millions of people died From what you call what you admitted here is a mismanagement by a communist administration I don't know right that there is any sort of mismanagement in a capitalist society that has led to as much death No, no, it's led to it's led. It's led Listen just in the past year. It's led to way more deaths just of children under the age of five It's just that we don't call it mismanagement because there's no manager to take responsibility for it Nobody's actually Holding the banksters like the the world bank and the imf 3.1 million children That's 3.1 million children under the age of five. That's on planet earth. Yes Okay, and you attribute and that includes countries of africa Yes, and you consider that countries of africa are capitalistic. So this is where How are they not trick doesn't work. How are they not? They're not because capitalism is not a system in which tribal violence dominates Every aspects of your life. So I don't know if you're aware this all all capitalism refers to All capitalism means is a system predicated on capital accumulation MCM MCM making more money Investing the money in commodities and making more money money is blind money doesn't care if you're starving money doesn't care If you're a prostitute selling your vagina for money, they don't capitalism care about any of that What capitalism cares about Is more money being created? That's it profit. Okay, and importantly in a free market And when you have that actually that's not true. That's not true capitalism Capital the only reason there's markets under capitalism is because of money But actually the tendency of capitalism is the destruction of free markets adam smith actually wrote about this himself Because capitalism couldn't overcome the issue of rent and landed rent Which all of the free market advocates at the time thought would actually Allow for free markets to be able to exist it never happened because rents are a part of capitalism. That's the issue Unproductive rents are a fundamental part of capitalism. Why because they contribute to capital accumulation Making more just for the sake of more money for the sake of money again That's completely blind to the basic human common realities We have and we seek to attend to and look Advocates of capitalism say that only inadvertently capitalism supports the common good of the people But everyone agrees that the common good should be in command the issue is that in capitalism? That's not the case. There's no such thing as a common good. The only common good Is money money more over which has gotten to such a ridiculous level of abstraction That's not even based in a commodity anymore. It's based on nonsense Printing of the Federal Reserve from thin air I would like to hop in real quick if I may sorry jf This debate is fantastic. It's going great. Awesome. Everyone's loving it. The chat is here for it We're like 450 people watching this great. I just want to give a quick call to action for everyone who hasn't hit that like button Or subscribed and keep the chat going. It's really really nice You two are respecting each other Greatly, however, I'm starting to notice just a little bit infrared if you would please allow jf to Yeah, sure finish a sentence. No problem. Fantastic. Yeah, you make it Everything you just heard from us Is absolute navigation on a parallel definition of capitalism that no one uses That is absolute hallucinations of as whose continuing is magic trick of relabeling everything and suddenly Stalin is great. The holodomor didn't happen or it was unintentional. Oops Oops a few million people dying and capitalism can happen in sub-Saharan Africa with child soldiers having a gun at your head Capitalism here a definition from imf.org Capitalism is often taught off as an economic system in which private actors own and control Property in accord with their interests and demand and supply freely sets prices in markets In a way that can serve the best interest of society So infrared is working with parallel definitions that he uses to slime himself away from his obligation to address The problems of communism in this debate and he mischaracterizes sub-Saharan African countries as capitalists So that he can include their death count in the capitalistic holodomor, which has never happened By the way, I just want to make a few points Even if I discounted every single death that happens in African countries I just have to look at a cursory glance of the history of capitalism in Europe And you'll find you have similar deaths and the insipience of the modernization and industrialization But let's put that aside for a second because you're saying that I'm not using the correct definition of capitalism But all I'm referring to is the reality of capitalism. I'm not referring to an ideal definition created by the imf That would be akin to just saying all communism is is what a twitter communist say it is instead of the reality That would be ridiculous, right? So the imf is a capitalist institution Of course, they're going to forward an ideal description of what capitalism is But the truth is all capitalism means is a system based in producing money for money's own sake And all those things you mentioned in africa of child soldiers and all these tribal conflicts If you actually pay attention to read behind the lines, what do you have? You have multinational corporations and development development banks like the imf issuing out predatory loans So that private interests can come plunder their resources own them privately as privately And leave the population destitute in ports to the point where they can't even feed themselves Because they don't even own the land that they stand on. So that's the reality of capitalism It's not ideal. And by the way, I'm not saying oh, you know what else there is Hold on. I didn't interrupt you. So don't interrupt me Um, you also said that I'm saying oh, oops a few million people die in the holder more whatever I want to move to another subject. I would like to end for that one. I I am not Jf jf. I didn't interrupt you. I there was an intervention by the moderator for no interruptions There was no interruptions No, no, no, it's not it's not I have to address the things you said I have to address the things you said I am not trying to under Under um represent or somehow belittle the horrific significance of the famine that happened in ukraine I'm not trying to say. Oh, it was a horrific Horrible disaster and and by the way a tsunami comes and wipes out millions of people That's also fucking horrific and I'm not even saying that we can be sure that horrible horrible tragedies aren't going to happen in the future All I'm trying to talk about is where does the responsibility lie? I'm not trying to say that all oopsies. It was just a mistake I'm trying to say that for the first time You can have a society own up and be accountable for the mistakes that are made by it Just like how we are also responsible for three million deaths per year of children under five that die A society that has a famine is responsible for that famine and you know what? That's better than having a famine and not being responsible and just saying that it was nature that did it or is this You we need to be responsible for every shortcoming in our society I want us to feel responsible for every single person who has died because of fentanyl I want us to feel responsible for every single young person in this country Who doesn't have a future and decides to kill themselves? Because they're completely isolated socially and they have no sense of purpose. I want us to feel responsible in this country For people evicted from their homes that get bankrupted by banks. Yes We are responsible. That is our system. That's responsible for that. It didn't just fall out of the sky So i'm not trying to say hello to more hello to more where the famine in ukraine Was nothing or meaningless or is just a little small mistake reality fucking harsh and bad shit happens But guess what you have to actually pay attention to why that is and just instead of just saying oh bad shit happened Yeah, bad shit's been happening man and nobody's been taking responsibility All right Right here is it will come with something that's around us and then it will flood it with one minute Speech that is populist in nature, but that means nothing It's all blah blah blah and it's all meant to To to cover with dust and dirt The error that he's committed to start with that he didn't want to call me out Immediately, so that's a problem And I would hope that the the moderator here can intervene when has gets into Telling a lie and then getting away with it because he gets to speak for two minutes after this It's really useless for the audience and we're losing everyone's time and for a read you attribute you've decided that africa was Capitalistic because there's money there But you know what else there is in africa a bunch of people who will commit violence Who will violate the freedom of others who will kill people and who will do so exactly On the basis of the interest that you came to defend today the people And for each of these african republics where some tribe has killed another You'll find names like the people's republic of this the people's republic of that And that is exactly what your system leads to call it mismanagement if you'd like It's a system of death of human elimination And of whoever survives at the end gets to corrupt the system in the way they want So if you want africa if you want the people's republic of infrared vote communism If you'd like a system that changes its leader that rotates across the most talented people to drive innovation Choose capitalism. That's my conclusion because this guy I can't anymore I'm willing to end all the super chats if you'd like But just one small question. I'm not going to ramble as you're saying I am Who owns the natural resources in africa? Is it the I know they call themselves maybe a people's republic But who owns their minds and their farmland and their basic resources is it multinational foreign private corporations? Or is it actually owned by the state or publicly just a small question? It is sometimes owned by the very people who call themselves the representative of the interest of the people So so what's an example of that? The people's republic of congo Doing traffic in mines of all kinds. You're saying the state owns the mines there The people who are participant to the state use their state power to enforce the ownership of mines and resources So who owns it? I don't know companies individuals local dictators. So that's communism Yeah, communism leads to a class of Property accumulators in its elite that benefit from the strong arm of the communist central authority that you So when when foreign companies hire thugs to come and protect their assets Um and bribe them with money to do so by the way as well You're saying that the private ownership of mines Is communist as long as a government is being hired by capitalist oligarchs to defend the property I'm saying that uh appealing to a central authority and giving it power Whether you call it communism or not is what you want to do and is what leads to death On this planet in reality So you're saying it's possible for capitalism to exist without a central authority to enforce The ownership by a tiny blood-sucking minority over the commonwealth of the entire people You're saying they don't need a government to enforce that I believe that a minarchy can exist a minimalist government that seeks only to apply to the respect of ownership and law The minimal non-aggression of others, but this government must remain small Okay, where does that exist? Um, I I've given you models, uh the early 20s Early early us early canada were examples of small government that applied those were monarchies They were not perfect monarchies. I would like a minarchy to go a little further than this personally So where does that exist? Well, again, I've given you the the best examples. I know of early north america Is early european conquested north america is what I have in mind So slavery? No, I don't stand for slavery But I don't think that the us could be I think that you could have an early us equivalent without slavery I think it's it's a myth this idea that early america's boom Was due to slavery. I don't think it was that much So, how would you have gotten rid of slavery without using the government? By giving a salary to the slaves who want to continue working freely So you're saying there wasn't a single slave owner who was smart enough to do that with the view that that would have maximized his profits See, see this is why I'm done with this discussion. I'm just asking you just ramen me No, no, I'm just saying no, but you're in this mood of oh, so you're saying so you're saying Oh, I'm just saying I've done to Jordan Peterson You're trying to do like this like this female host that did to Jordan Peterson So what you're saying is all right then speak for yourself speak for yourself It's not what I'm saying. I've already given my answers. I'm done personally I'm just asking how you would have gotten rid of slavery and and and I said I would pay the slaves now What now? What's your next question? So would that have removed slavery on a systemic level because how are you going to ensure every other slave owner acts as you do? I'm presuming you're a slave owner in this scenario No, I'm talking about I'm not talking about the single slave owner paying its slaves. I'm talking about at the society level Yeah, what would be their incentive make make a lot make a lot that's using the government slaves So by force for using the minarchy by force Using the minarchy I have no problem with the use of force to apply the law So but but so it's communism when the government uses force to defend a private ownership of Foreign private ownership of mines in the Congo, but it's not somehow communism for the government to use force to Make these slave owners spend their money in ways that they might not as you do so to protect someone from aggression I have no problem with violence. I have no problem with self-defense. For example It's not a problem. But the people who do this in the Congo to control mines, right? They are not doing this in self-defense. They are doing this to control mines But but the argument could be made by the owners of those mines that they're defending their right to own the mines They bought Forgive me. Um, our open discussion time general essentially is yeah has ended. However You both clearly have so much more you want to say Um, so how you guys feel about I give you both Three minutes each right now To summarize your positions and then we'll go into super chat If you want I'm in for the super chats right now because I'm done answering these never-ending questions that don't lead to anything really All right, that's a fair point. You're okay with that then forever. Just go to super chats Yeah, yeah, I'm fine with that. All right, then let's let's do that Um All right, so, uh, yeah, if you guys haven't got a super chat in feel free to get one in now We've got a bunch already in queue and I'm gonna start Reading away. So first from samar row for 4.99 Says ha's opening statement hits on the despair A lot of young people feel rightly or wrongly both debaters. What is the best way to combat? Dumerism You know it might sound like a cliche But I would just say you're not in it alone. Whatever dumer feeling you're having Everyone else is feeling that way too And it's just a matter of who's better at disguising it or not, but I would say you're not alone and I would say this is a common reality we have And I that should relieve a burden from you. Don't don't just think this is this is something you're experiencing This is something going on in the world, you know, and I hope that at least helps at least a little bit relieving the burden of You know the dumerism I don't know what dumerism means exactly. There's various reasons why you could be depressed, but I would say just Just be thankful to be alive and if you're alive today, you still have a shot at reproducing You still have a shot at building your life And if you're in a capitalist nation, you still have a shot at building wealth, which is amazing All right, thank you fact jr sends five dollars, but I wasn't hip with their super chat So I'll acknowledge their super chat, but we won't be saying what he said Which gives us right to our next one, which is mustafa jav 499 Did you guys know beforehand that jubi posted a group debate on the same topic? No, we had decided this debate about four days ago. So I don't I don't think we've heard about this I think eddie from midwest remarks was there. I if that's the one you're referring to a shout out eddie, you know Yeah, I don't think we need to be limited to one channel doing a debate on a similar topic either I think it's a good discussion to have overall Our next super chat from ozen talks five dollars. Why did you say everything the government does is communism jf? How is that? How is that governing the means of production? Well, because government is one of the attempts at implementing communism really at implementing the power of the people that infrared has been describing in his intro Now, it's true that government isn't necessarily thought of as communism and it's true that also government has some role to preserve the state of right in a capitalist nation But it remains the case that people like infrared will talk about the interest of the people until they are asked to Delineate, how are you going to do this? How are the interests of the people going to be enforced onto a central authority? And the only thing that we know of that looks like the interest of the people That's an attempt at capturing it is government and it fails miserably Um, so infrared because jf did mention you I'll allow you to respond But when the question is directed as a particular person, I like them to have a final word So I'll let him finish. Yeah, I would say I don't think you can create a system of government That is going to be impervious to the to possibility of corruption of government You can't have government account for I don't believe in that I think there always needs to be an external pressure That you can't account for beforehand that you can't calculate in your system And that's what actually gives us human freedom to determine our own fate as a people Right, you need to have this element of the possibility that yeah, people might rise up and overthrow the government People might rise up and not fall in line. There might be chaos And lack of stability. There's no we're not robots. We're not animals to be domesticated So there's a certain point where government does not have power And government can't account for that So again, you need to have a tradition of popular sovereignty of people being able to exercise authority and and actually Allow leaders to rise among them to rep organically. I'm not saying a system for this, right? That gives voice to their concerns and their problems And you know what could be a good pro it could be a good outcome could be a bad outcome You can't design it beforehand. That's like saying we don't have free will we have free will If we could be good or we could be bad But we're not going to be we we don't have any chance of being good When our system is designed to only care about profit and not take into account the very simple reality of people's existence I'm not saying communism. I would I would like to have to have the final word on this question And we'll get to the farad Said something very key here. He said I don't think you can design a government system that is impervious to Corruption and so therefore what is the answer the government must be the smallest possible So that the opportunity for corruptions be minimized I agree it should be the smallest possible. Yeah, I mean, I don't necessarily just that's not jf having the final word But I guess you agree. So it's okay. Yeah. All right moving on So c e five dollars this question is for you infrared What do you think about the song bun system and the human rights situation in north korea? Uh, the human first of all, I think this notion of human rights where you can apply one standard of what that means to every single civilization culture first of all is nonsense Second of all, the truth is we know very little about north korea and a lot of the things that are reported out from it Have time and time again be proven to be nonsense and bs So I just don't buy it. I don't buy that North there's a skewed crisis of of oppression in north korea and so on, you know, there's that woman. What's her name? She's pretty famous. What is her name again? I I really for she's got more information than than that woman Yeah, yeah, I forgot her name, but it really epitomizes the proper. Yeah. Yeah. Yenmi park. That was her name she really epitomizes the kind of Bullshit propaganda industry against north korea and if you don't know who she is look her up And she's been proven to be a huge liar and exaggerates for money. So You know, I would say we don't let's not make assumptions about north korea until we actually know what's going on. That's what I would say All right Our next super chat from samar rayo 999 Jf how will you keep your capitalist system from turning tyrannical? What keeps the elan musks from hiring soldiers to ensure or retain his power once he has the money to do so Quite simple There is still a state of law enforced by a minimal state and so elan musk cannot overpower you through violence force extortion of any kind or threat And so if he was to buy soldiers, he would simply be found to lose all his wealth And and his moves to be illegal and he would end up in jail. So i'm not talking here about the system that has no law I'm talking about the system that has a law, but it's a lot that's minimal It's not a law that seeks to redistribute and manage the economy It's a law that simply makes sure that everyone concerns to what's going on and the free market can operate Awesome. Thank you Our next question osean talks another five dollars Who should americans select as potas out of anyone who is currently living and why? What if it comes down to just biden versus trump? Uh, so this question is not directed anyone specific. So whoever would like to answer first I'll give you guys both the chance to answer between biden and trump Trump you know between them both. It's not a great decision you'd have to make But i'm not even saying you should vote or i'm gonna vote. I'm just saying if I had to probably trump And i'm not going to go into the reasons if as far as someone who's living right now who should be president I think jackson jackson hinkle should be president, you know So that's that's my take, but You know, I will go for trump and for anyone perhaps uh Elon musk with trump as a side runner or elon musk with tucker carlson as a side runner Interesting. All right. Thank you so much Our next question is from eithan osborne five dollars hasbulla Step into the lumpen lounge with me bro. It's launching soon. Um, I'll be honest. I didn't really know what this meant I hope it's friendly I think it's probably referring to a podcast or something. Um If you have any inquiries and you want to just send me a dm on twitter and we'll see if it can happen You know, all right. I wasn't sure what I read. Yeah I was like this better not be insulting to infrared. No, it sounds it sounds like a like a YouTube show or something. I don't know. Yeah, awesome Uh, next sunflower Member for two years and sends ten dollars Infrared Is it communism state more prone to decay than a capitalist one? Even if we have crony capitalism Don't you think crony capitalism will always emerge? And persist due to human nature No, I completely disagree. You know capitalism hasn't been around for the majority of human human beings being around We had feudalism. We had slave society ancient Greece and Rome You know, I would say uh, is communism more prone to decay? Well, that depends it depends on the people of a communist country And there's a degree of collective responsibility there, you know, that's what to me That's a free will and being a human being means doesn't mean Everything's just going to work out by itself. But to be honest I mean, uh, there's corruption in china today, for example, there's no doubt about that, right But do they let their corruption get to the point where it negatively affects so much of the population? They don't usually when it gets to that point Those guys get completely removed and thrown out And it china's not perfect not at all, but I think they manage it a lot better than we do So that's an example, you know Bill jf that you really wanted to respond to that. I'll allow it if you want but in I was I was reacting visually to the the regular chat Go ahead. All right Uh, so I only got a few more super chats here left that I didn't get time to Add to my handy little screen there. So first ethan osborne sends two dollars In support of infrared, I'll just say that C. E. Five dollars Infrared do you see a role for military intervention ever to stop? Apologies for this word atrocities and human rights abuse by other nations Atrocities might be what that word was Um, it depends on the historical connection You have to those countries specifically a geographically and civilizationally speaking. So generally speaking, no Um, I don't believe in the use of military force to enforce any kind of human rights But I do think a form of regional responsibility could exist. For example, what's going on in gaza I think it is incumbent upon the regional forces and actors to intervene there because this is their civilization And this is their region if something horrible was going on in canada, you know, I think there's an argument to be made that maybe maybe There there could be grounds for the american people to come and Put an end to the the chaos and the nonsense. I don't know But generally speaking no, it just depends on the context not universally definitely not All right in our last super chat of the night is for jf from samar reo again Our big super chatter of the night 999 jf has argued before that humans can cultivate queen sterile worker reproductive models Is communism the analog for the theoretical human queen worker system? What's wrong with that in principle jf? Uh, it is an analog loosely Uh, communism with a central authority will lead to a queen of control of sterile workers. Yes And to a certain extent it might be a real one in the sense that the real the workers could be really sterilized Uh, if there was for example a communist dictator that veers toward medical fascism Uh, but I don't think it's a valid a true analogy that works in principle Simply because in communism you still have the workers able to breathe And if they are not to the point of being interfered with their reproduction if we're not talking about the medical fascism system They can still breathe and therefore it's not like a colony. It's more like a a symbiotic tree in which microbes are just invading and living off the tree It's a system with competition predation parasitism and it's much more complex than a queen colony All right. Thank you so much So yeah, thank you gentlemen so much. This has been an interesting debate I know myself I'm gonna have to go back and rewatch this three or four times before I fully understand every idea that was shared here If you're watching this post live event, make sure you add in the comments down below what you guys think about Our debaters positions and share your ideas Um, jf any given day? Where can people find you? Uh, jfg tonight you can check out at jfg.world. You'll see all my links I'm live every day on others Awesome and infrared if someone was looking for you to open dialogue, where might they go? So right now i'm on kick.com slash infrared You can also find me at infrared show youtube.com slash infrared show And then finally you can find me at my twitter, which is twitter.com slash infra haas So those are three places Awesome amazing. Thank you so much for hanging out with us tonight Thank you. Thanks to the audience for you guys coming out. It was a great time Um, anyone who wants to dive deeper into this topic matters now is hosting an after show immediately After I shut things down here. So, um, hopefully we'll see some of you guys over there Have a great night and thanks everyone for coming out. Thank you